next »

[Paul Eres]

@st33d - i don't blame the judges actually, from my perspective it's more the igf that's at fault by not making it clear to judges that they are expected to play a game for more than 3 minutes, and not penalizing (and instead defending) that type of behavior when it's found out. it's like blaming a class of kids in elementary school for being 'too wild' when their teacher says 'do whatever you want, you'll all get A's anyway, talk or draw or whatever'

[Fallsburg]

That's why it's called an entrance fee (standard thing in most contests) and not a "get feedback from x judges on your game" fee.

While I would love it if they were one in the same, realistically the 2 things have nothing to do with one another.

Well, by that logic, fuck judging any games.  Just pick a couple at random (or those you heard about) and call it a day.  

Expecting feedback might be a bit optimistic, but I'm pretty sure that expecting judges to at least look at the game isn't unreasonable.

[Chris Pavia]

I said in a previous post that not even playing your assigned game is unacceptable. But the point remains that entrance fees have nothing at all to do with receiving feedback on your game (although it would be great if it did).

Do Olympic Ice Skaters get detailed feedback and breakdowns of their routines from judges?

[Christian Knudsen]

This doesn't seem as much about not getting feedback as judges not even playing your game that you paid $100 to enter into a competition.

[Paul Eres]

as a point of interest, in a previous IGF (i forget which year) feedback from judges was required; but it didn't seem to work out that well and after a year of trying it they abandoned the idea. that may have been for the best

so yeah again, this isn't about judges not being superhuman, it's about doing some baseline of what they are expected to do (play the game *through* the tutorial, for instance, and maybe try out a level or two)

[Chris Pavia]

This doesn't seem as much about not getting feedback as judges not even playing your game that you paid $100 to enter into a competition.

Ah, good point. How large is the pool? I'm under the impression that it's quite large. In which case it's just human nature that some people aren't going to be as dedicated as others, and some not dedicated at all. Although I agree with the person who said that those individuals shouldn't be invited back next year.

[Dragonmaw]

I would have automatically not played Kale if it was assigned to me because virtual dpad on an iPhone makes me mad.

as a point of interest, in a previous IGF (i forget which year) feedback from judges was required; but it didn't seem to work out that well and after a year of trying it they abandoned the idea. that may have been for the best

That was the year I started: 2010.

[Paul Eres]

out of curiosity, what other ways do iphone retro games handle their control schemes? requiring that you connect a joystick? moving left when you put your finger there? i don't understand how else they could have done it

[st33d]

Mage Gauntlet uses an invisible joystick control scheme, as does Minotron. Both work pretty well. It goes off the premise that you may have virtual tap-buttons on the screen, but anywhere else is the joystick. Swipe and hold to imply a direction. Any further movement is interpreted as a new direction.

Edge and also Forget Me Not also successfully use virtual joysticks.

They trust their players.

All the ones I've tried with a static joystick on the screen have been excruciatingly painful to play because there's no haptic feedback. It's impossible to keep your attention on the gameplay without double checking you haven't slipped away from the control scheme.

[Squid Party]

phil fish re-entered fez despite already winning an award.

please don't tell me I am the only one who finds something wrong with this.

your are not, don`t worry

[st33d]

Oh don't start that again.

We're bitching about something else now. Please keep up.

[Matthew]

Regarding money!  When you enter a competition--any competition--your money goes towards:

1) Running the event

2) Shit the finalists win

If you enter, and don't win, you don't get anything (except participation in an event you helped pay for).  This is how competitions work.  That participation is still super valuable to most people, especially as a goal.  I've "lost" physical competitions where I still end up in the best shape of my life due to goal-focused training.  Judge feedback is a distraction; it's not the point.

[Paul Eres]

@st33d - thanks for the explanation -- so basically virtual buttons are okay, but a virtual joystick is worse than just using the rest of the screen besides the buttons as a joystick? sounds reasonable

i wonder if there's an iphone game emulator that lets you play iphone games on windows -- that might work for igf judges who don't own an iphone who are assigned iphone games

[Squid Party]

It kinda bothers me if your game does really well because it is a very good game (e.g minecraft)and you make lots of money and then you still get all the prize money because that seems kinda of broken but there is no real way around it, does it bother anyone else?

[Paul Eres]

@mattheww - yeah but you also have to realize that people won't be as encouraged to work as hard to win a competition if they perceive the process of judging as non-objective or random

it's one thing to try to do 100 pushups in 30 days and fail and reach 80 instead, it's another thing to try to win a game-making contest, make the best game you can, fail to get mentioned, and not know why you failed. feedback gives the "feedback" to players so they can have some idea what they did wrong, which they would otherwise be clueless about

you can sometimes infer that by playing the games that were actually chosen, but sometimes the choices are bizarre. for instance, bit trip runner was a finalist in visual art for 2011


i repeat: a finalist for visual art

what are the judges seeing that i'm not?